Abstract
Background
Rhinoplasty is one of the most common operations performed with favorable results and high patient satisfaction. However, when complications occur or when the desired outcome is not achieved, patients may seek litigation on the premise that there was a violation in the standard of care. Knowledge of malpractice claims can inform rhinoplasty surgeons on how to minimize risk of future litigation as well as improve patient satisfaction.
Objectives
1) To identify motives for seeking medical malpractice litigation after rhinoplasty; 2) To examine outcomes of malpractice litigation after rhinoplasty in the United States.
Methods
The Westlaw legal database was reviewed for all available court decisions related to malpractice after rhinoplasty. Data collected and analyzed included plaintiff gender, location, specialty of defendant(s), plaintiff allegation, and adjudicated case outcomes.
Results
Twenty-three cases were identified between 1960 and 2018, located in 12 states in the United States. Plaintiffs were 70% female. Otolaryngologists were cited in 11 cases while 12 cases involved a plastic surgeon. All cases alleged negligence. Cases involved “technical” errors (69.6%), “unsatisfactory” outcomes (39.1%), inadequate follow-up or aftercare (30.4%), issues with the informed consent process (21.7%), unexpectedly extensive surgery (8.7%), improper medication administration (4.3%), and failure to recognize symptoms (4.3%). Twenty of the 23 adjudicated cases (86.9%) were ruled in favor of the surgeon. Contributing factors in cases alleging malpractice included poor aesthetic outcome/disfigurement (60.7%), new (post-surgical) onset/persistent nasal symptoms (30.4%), postoperative pain (21.7%), orbital/ocular injury (17.4%), burns (4%), nerve damage (4%), and issues with sleep (4%).
Conclusions
Malpractice litigation after rhinoplasty favored the surgeon in the majority of the adjudicated cases reviewed. The most common reason for litigating was dissatisfaction with aesthetic outcomes. Rhinoplasty surgeons may mitigate possible litigation by developing a positive doctor-patient relationship, clearly understanding the patient’s surgical expectations, obtaining detailed informed consent while maintaining frequent and caring communication with the patient.